So, I am curious how many people would be open to a 1P and 2P split on the leaderboard. Not because one is better than the other, but so people can run both. As far as I'm aware, most people consider them separate, and wouldn't mind them having different leaderboards.
If we were to split it, I think the way it would work is we'd go back to the original 5 categories, then make 1P and 2P sub categories.

Wilb3ar7293Wilb3ar7293, Kasokudo_TomeruKasokudo_Tomeru and 6 others like this. 

I agree as well, as 2P saves a lot of time

Wilb3ar7293Wilb3ar7293 and LaxxiusLaxxius like this. 

It's been the topic of debate for quite a while now. I've seen a lot of arguments about it. On top of letting people do both as they want it, it might stop some of the really dumb fights I've seen it. Split em.

LaxxiusLaxxius likes this. 

It's absurd for a game like SMG to have 10 categories simply because people can't agree on what should be and shouldn't be allowed. This is absolutely ridiculous.

LaxxiusLaxxius, AmpsenAmpsen and 7 others like this. 

I am all in for separating 1P and 2P, would make it a lot easier for the average Joe to quickly understand the leader boards when looking up times. And since 2P's potential time save over 1P is large enough in which in return makes the run much different it would only make sense.

Kasokudo_TomeruKasokudo_Tomeru and LaxxiusLaxxius like this. 

I don't run this game, nor will I ever, so maybe my opinion is irrelevant, but it seems really stupid to me to have 4 any% categories just because some people want to use slower strats.¤

¤There's nothing wrong with using slow strats, unless you're trying to go fast, but I don't think that should denote a new category just because some people don't want to go fast.

LaxxiusLaxxius, AprilSRAprilSR and 3 others like this. 

Basically what Marc said. Most people consider them separate anyways, so it would also end these types of arguments, some of which I have regrettably participated in. Addressing the 10 categories issue, I doubt that matters much. The leaderboard would still look clean, as long as 1P and 2P were made as sub categories, and having more categories doesn't really have a downside does it?

LaxxiusLaxxius likes this. 

A good comparison may be to Hoverless and normal any% in SMS, ShadowLugia. The two runs have the same objective, but have differences in how they play, making one of them more difficult. Of course, SMG isn't SMS, but that's the best comparison I could find.

LaxxiusLaxxius, ThetechboyThetechboy and aekaek like this. 

Lets clarify a few things here. I'm making this because the argument I see over and over again is "2P is very different from 1P," which simply isn't true.

1) 2P does not drastically change the run. Several stars are exactly the same 2P as they are 1P. Off the top of my head, that includes Loopdeeloop, Space Junk 2, Beach Bowl 2, Ghostly 1, Sweet Sweet, Good Egg Luigi, Honeyhive Comet, Gusty Garden Comet, Freezeflame 1, Sea Slide 1, Sea Slide 2, Sea Slide Comet, Drip Drop, and Honeyhive Luigi. Beyond that, there's tons of stars that are barely affected by 2P usage at all, like Flipswitch that uses 2P once to save something like a half second.

2) 2P does not save large amounts of time. Contrary to popular belief, 2P specific tricks that save large amounts of time are few and far between. Faster in this case does not equate to much faster. The reason Neg's run is so much better than everyone else is not entirely because he uses 2P, it's because he's actually just a whole lot better than everyone else. Neg's run had roughly 90 seconds of major mistakes, and his movement is spot on throughout almost the entire run. I'd be amazed if and RTA 2P run ever got below 2:32, and 1P runs are likely to approach 2:37 range in the near future. Kayareya's SoB is 2:34 at this point, and although I haven't been able to find Neg's SoB I'd be quite surprised if it was below 2:30.

Over the course of a 2 and a half hour speed run a 5 minute time save that only changes the route by one star and has several stars that are completely identical is simply not a large enough difference to warrant the creation of 5 new categories.

LaxxiusLaxxius, AprilSRAprilSR and 8 others like this. 

Don't split em, it makes no sense to separate the two IMO, in agreement with aforementioned reasons.

''A good comparison may be to Hoverless and normal any% in SMS''

No. Hoverless is a challenge, restricting players to not use a vital element of a regular playthrough and/or speedrun. The slower run in that case is actually the more challenging (speaking for an average runner).

In SMG its the opposite case. 2P adds something that the average speedrunner doesn't use, because of reasons. For me personally it was just the discomfort of running it that way. I however accept that I make use of a slower method which takes less effort, and therefore accept that my times will be slower than people who use that faster method.

Having 2P runner's times on a separate leaderboard will totally disregard their actual effort into learning the 2P strats (however little time it may take them it still takes time) vs the less effort it takes to run 1P. Not to mention that it would look like some sort of meme category, with only a couple of runs on the LB. It'd be very demotivating for an aspiring runner to run 2P when you can only compare to (compete with) a couple of people vs the dozens of people on the 1P LB

If you'd like to compare to only 1P runs there's the nice drop-down box that has implemented for exactly that reason.

Edit: Also very much what frogy said in the post above me.

LaxxiusLaxxius, AprilSRAprilSR and 3 others like this. 

It's the same objective LMAO ''Beat the game as fast as possible''. The method differs, the objective is the same

LaxxiusLaxxius, AmpsenAmpsen and 2 others like this. 

my opinion is that you should just completely remove 2p because people who use it are white republican terrorists who are allowed to play games

LaxxiusLaxxius, PeterAfroPeterAfro and 4 others like this. 

@obnoxious "Beat the game as fast as possible while only using one controller"
The first part of this "Beat the game as fast as possible," is what's referred to as the objective.
The second part, "while only using one controller," is what's referred to as the restriction.
When you put the objective and the restriction together, you get the category.

Example: Any% No Wrong Warp
Objective: "Beat the game as fast as possible,"
Restriction: "while avoiding using the wrong warp glitch"

Notice that this has the same objective as a regular Any% run even though it is defined as a different category.

LaxxiusLaxxius and AwesomecuberAwesomecuber like this. 

obnoxious, why not add a category for Beat the game as fast as possible with one hand, Beat the game as fast as possible with one hand constantly jacking off with the other, Beat the game with only feet, and Beat the game with the 2p controller in your mouth.

As much of a joke the entire concept of splitting faster and slower strats is to me and many other speedrunners, I don't personally think that the difference between Beat the game as fast as possible and Beat the game as fast as possible is enough to warrant a new category, for the reasons frogyfro mentioned above.

LaxxiusLaxxius and FishFish like this. 

Fair points, for not splitting them, I can agree to that. I'll argue a bit more, but forgive me if I am unable to word everything correctly. I don't think that 2P would be considered a meme category, but I can definitely see where that opinion is coming from. I think separating them would make 2P runs a bit more popular, which in turn would make them not look as bad to newcomer's eyes. As stated before, a category split would also decrease these types of arguments, as they would officially be considered separate.

Now, I'm not trying to be an insensitive jerk in my next comment, but most of the opinions on 2P in this post come from people who don't run the game, and while matter a little bit, I think an opinion is more valued when you've spent time in the subject you're arguing about.


They would be a little more popular, but they would be considered a separate entity from 1P, which is not the goal. See Miror's original comment.

Sludgy, I don't mean to be an insensitive jerk, but so far we have one person with a good time on the game arguing for 1P and one person with a good time arguing for 2P. You're in the exact same boat my friend.

LaxxiusLaxxius, AwesomecuberAwesomecuber and FishFish like this. 

Okay. I've argued my point, and I have nothing else to say. If anyone wants to contribute to the split then I may start arguing again.

LaxxiusLaxxius likes this. 

Actually, I just remembered. I thought that maybe I'd share Vallu's opinion. He also is not opposed to a split, although I don't know the exact details. Just in case this could help my argument. 🙂

LaxxiusLaxxius likes this.